Why is the quran so hard to translate?

[Booklover]

Thank you my dear sweet friend!
Yes, i think we would have a great time.
I really do hope you manage to get here for world youth day this year, Sydney that is, ill take you around and show you everything myself of course, and since your a fellow Catholic and pilgrim, id even let you stay with me!

That would be so nice! I’d love it! Have a great time in Europe and tell us all about your trip. How long will you be there?

Vickie

 

[Booklover]

Muslims have been commanded to spread the message, and that includes other languages.

So were Jesus’ disciples. He told them to: go and make disciples of ALL the nations and baptize them in the NAME of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and teach them to observe all the commands I gave you.

I’m not going to answer this question because of the built-in assumption with which I disagree.

Of course you won’t!

Acts 2, 1-13

The Coming of the Spirit. When the time for Pentecost was fulfilled, they were all in one place together. And suddenly there came from the sky a noise like a strong driving wind, and it filled the entire house in which they were. Then there appeared to them tongues as of fire, which parted and came to rest on each one of them. And they were all filled with the holy Spirit and began to speak in different tongues, as the Spirit enabled them to proclaim.

Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven staying in Jerusalem. At this sound, they gathered in a large crowd, but they were confused because each one heard them speaking in his own language. They were astounded, and in amazement they asked, “Are not all these people who are speaking Galileans? Then how does each one of us hear them in his own native language: We are Parthians, Medes, and Elamites, inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the districts of Lybia near Cyrene, as well as travelers from Rome, both Jews and converts to Judaism, Cretans and Arabs, yet we hear them speaking in our own tongues of the might acts of God.” They were all astounded and bewildered, and said to one another, “What does this mean?” But others said, scoffing, “They have had too much new wine.”

They didn’t have to go to “night school” and learn other languages. They could go anywhere and preach and they would be understood in the language of the people they were visiting! Now that is awesome!

Vickie

 

[Booklover]

=Sister Amy;3386127
You see, the beauty of a poem, for example, has to do with the phrasing, the words chosen. Sometimes they rhyme, they have a particular meter, as well as imagery. The Qur’an is in the same way–you can translate it. You can translate all the words, the images, but when I say you lose the beauty, you lose the rhyme, the flow, the meter–just like you’d lost with the poem. And that is part of the beauty. There is also an element of linguisitic eloquence which has to do with word order and emphasis words. In English words have to be in a certain order to make sense; whereas that’s not the case in a language like Arabic–the grammar is constructed differently.

Only a Muslim would see beauty in the Quran!

The answer is authenticity. How can you believe a collection of anonymous authors? And would you? Or would you believe just one man who you know was telling the truth, and who had no prior religious training or study, who had no other way of telling you except that it was from God?

We know that Shakespeare wrote “Hamlet” but does the fact that we know who wrote it make “Hamlet” divine inspiration?

Where do you get the idea that we “know he was telling the truth”?? You believe blindly in him because you want to, not because you have any “proof”. He didn’t need any religious training, he had interactions with Christians and others and used what he’d learned from them when he decided to declare himself a prophet and authored the Quran which is full of errors, inconsistencies and absurdities, proving its origins to be human.

Vickie

 

[FaithofAbraham]

…the Quran which is full of errors, inconsistencies and absurdities, proving its origins to be human.

What is one inconsistency, let’s have a look at it.

 

[diza]

So you christians have suceeded in corrupting your bible and now you what to do the same with the PURE AND HOLY Quran. NO CHANCE!

And why in the world do you worship 3 GODS and deceive yourself that its one. Jesus a beloved prophet of Islam never asked you to worship him. Nor did THE angel gabriel. Peace be upon them. And why are you so bothered about Islam and not the other religions in the world? Is only because you know that its the only true religion.

repent and follow Islam before its too late!!!

 

[Booklover]

What is one inconsistency, let’s have a look at it.

Quran 22: 47 A day in the sight of the Lord is like a thousand years of your reckoning. Quran-32:5: To Him, on a Day, the space whereof will be a thousands years of your rekoning
Quran 70: 4 The angels and the spirit ascend unto him in a day the measure whereof is Fifty thousands years.

And there are plenty more here.

Vickie

 

[Sister_Amy]

The word for “day” in Arabic does not necessarily mean a day, 24-hr period. Sunset to sunset or something like that. The word is “yaum” and it can simply mean a period of time. The angels ascend in a period of time described as 50,000 years. The “Day” of Judgment is described as 50,000 years. And about a “day” it seems like 1000 years to God. Clearly the verses aren’t talking about the same period of time–and neither is that even implied, as you suggested. Qur’an beats you.

Indeed, if the Qur’an were not from God, you would find many discrepancies.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

I calculate about 3000 years from when Jesus left to Judgment using 1000 years = 1 day. 2000 years until he returns, another 1000 when Satan is bound.

While the actual Day of Judgment may well be more like 50,000 years. There will be a lot of people to judge.

 

[ralphinal]

Let me go on.

First, God would have known how much the non-Arabic translation would lose in the nuances and imagery, but He used it after all. Why? Does God speak Arabic only?

Second, While the Christian and Jewish texts lose something in the translation, the loss isn’t so much for a Christian to tell someone that they cannot understand the Bible if it isn’t in Greek or Hebrew. How many times are we told that we cannot understand the Koran in anything but Arabic.

Third, if Islam is for all, why not use simple language that can be understood by all no matter the tongue. To me, it reeks of Arabic Suprimacy. Salvation cannot be limited by language.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Let me go on.

First, God would have known how much the non-Arabic translation would lose in the nuances and imagery, but He used it after all. Why? Does God speak Arabic only?

There is no proof of the statement that God only speaks Arabic. No evidence at all that other prophets even spoke Arabic. All beautiful language–as poems, and opera as I have already explained–loses something in translation. The Psalms, for example, lose something in the translation. It doesn’t matter what language–I think it’s only people who view their own as somehow a superior language who have a problem with books in another. But English did exist at the time–so the Qur’an couldn’t have been revealed in English. Muhammad didn’t speak English, so it wouldn’t have made sense. And the people around him didn’t speak English either–so the message would have been utterly useless. God says he listens to the call of EVERYONE who calls on him–and that means in ANY language.

Second, While the Christian and Jewish texts lose something in the translation, the loss isn’t so much for a Christian to tell someone that they cannot understand the Bible if it isn’t in Greek or Hebrew. How many times are we told that we cannot understand the Koran in anything but Arabic.

It is fascinating though that modern scholars are in fact going back to the Greek to get the “full” meaning of the Gospels. Have you not heard a sermon yet on the meaning of the word for “love” which is used by Paul? It is also possible that the translator selects one meaning for a word, but it is incorrect. For example, there are over 20 meanings of the word meaning “hand” in Arabic. So if you are translating it, how do you select a word? How do you know exactly what it means? The word you choose might not encompass all those meanings, so it is naturally deficient.

Third, if Islam is for all, why not use simple language that can be understood by all no matter the tongue. To me, it reeks of Arabic Suprimacy. Salvation cannot be limited by language.

There is no language on earth that is just so “simple” that everyone can understand it, no matter their native tongue. People all speak different languages–there is no one language for all of mankind. Salvation is NOT limited by language. A Muslim does not need to know Arabic to be a Muslim. The Qur’an is in Arabic though, and that is part of how it has been preserved–in the original Arabic, which Muslims usually learn to read and write at a young age just for the sake of reading the Qur’an without comprehension, and many decide to study Arabic later in life to acquire a better understanding. It’s not required. No Arabic Supremacy.

 

[ralphinal]

There is no proof of the statement that God only speaks Arabic. No evidence at all that other prophets even spoke Arabic. All beautiful language–as poems, and opera as I have already explained–loses something in translation. The Psalms, for example, lose something in the translation. It doesn’t matter what language–I think it’s only people who view their own as somehow a superior language who have a problem with books in another. But English did exist at the time–so the Qur’an couldn’t have been revealed in English. Muhammad didn’t speak English, so it wouldn’t have made sense. And the people around him didn’t speak English either–so the message would have been utterly useless. God says he listens to the call of EVERYONE who calls on him–and that means in ANY language.

I do not disagree.

It is fascinating though that modern scholars are in fact going back to the Greek to get the “full” meaning of the Gospels. Have you not heard a sermon yet on the meaning of the word for “love” which is used by Paul? It is also possible that the translator selects one meaning for a word, but it is incorrect. For example, there are over 20 meanings of the word meaning “hand” in Arabic. So if you are translating it, how do you select a word? How do you know exactly what it means? The word you choose might not encompass all those meanings, so it is naturally deficient.

Again, I do not disagree. As a point, when I teach my confirmation class, I teach the different loves used by Paul.

There is no language on earth that is just so “simple” that everyone can understand it, no matter their native tongue. People all speak different languages–there is no one language for all of mankind. Salvation is NOT limited by language. A Muslim does not need to know Arabic to be a Muslim. The Qur’an is in Arabic though, and that is part of how it has been preserved–in the original Arabic, which Muslims usually learn to read and write at a young age just for the sake of reading the Qur’an without comprehension, and many decide to study Arabic later in life to acquire a better understanding. It’s not required. No Arabic Supremacy.

I agree that Salvation is not limited by language. What you are not seeing is that when we ask about Islam, we are told that we should read the Koran. When we read it, and ask, we are told that since we did not read it in Arabic, we did not really read it. Then, when an Arab literate person reads it, and still asks, they say that since we are not in the Arab culture we cannot understand it. Simply put, it seems that there is no way for a non-Muslim to understand what the Koran says. I have no issue with reading the book for myself, but I have neither the time nor inclination to learn a language that will serve no purpose in my life. If I cannot grasp it in English, it has no place on my shelf.

 

[Sister_Amy]

What you are not seeing is that when we ask about Islam, we are told that we should read the Koran. When we read it, and ask, we are told that since we did not read it in Arabic, we did not really read it. Then, when an Arab literate person reads it, and still asks, they say that since we are not in the Arab culture we cannot understand it. Simply put, it seems that there is no way for a non-Muslim to understand what the Koran says. I have no issue with reading the book for myself, but I have neither the time nor inclination to learn a language that will serve no purpose in my life. If I cannot grasp it in English, it has no place on my shelf.

Ahh. Well… I read the Qur’an in English–nobody told me I wasn’t really reading it because it wasn’t Arabic. I think I missed quite a bit because it wasn’t Arabic, but I still found it to be profoundly moving. I generally recommend people read the Saheeh International Translation–this is the one which has been recommend to me by my Arabic teacher (who is… the best ever… very biased I am) and also by someone I know who has memorized the entire Qur’an (and can translate it at will) and others whose opinion I trust.

Is it better to read in Arabic? Yes, I won’t deny that. I myself am more powerfully moved when I read it in Arabic. However, if you are just reading it to get a general idea of the meaning, English translations are enough.

If I as a Muslim am allowed to read the Qur’an in English, then certainly you as a non-Muslim are allowed to. I have a Mormon friend who told me he wanted to learn Arabic before reading the Qur’an–and I wouldn’t recommend that for anyone! For someone truly interested, the nuances can be explained by a Qur’an scholar, or even a good book of tafsir (commentary/exegesis), some of which have also been translated into English.

 

[Geocacher]

This always intregued me about the human languages here on this Earth. The Bible or the Qur’an, both having been translated from their native tounges to English and other languages, could make it a challenge to figure out what the Writers’ thought processes were, as they were putting the words down on paper, like in the gospels.

I have read many many Near Death Experiences over the years, and many of them, are not able to say in human words, what they have experienced, because of the limitations of the human languages. About a previous topic about a day, equaling a thousand years, from what I read from many Near Death Experiences, is that most of them who have the experience, have no sense of time while out of body. There basically is no fixed measured Time in Heaven as we have it in Mortality here on Earth.

The bible is an example of needing to pray for the spirit when reading it, for the Holy Spirit can help you understand what your reading at times. The Holy Spirit can help at times, with understanding the scriptures, but life would be too easy if the Holy Spirit were to help you understand the entire bible, word for word.

 

[ralphinal]

Ahh. Well… I read the Qur’an in English–nobody told me I wasn’t really reading it because it wasn’t Arabic. I think I missed quite a bit because it wasn’t Arabic, but I still found it to be profoundly moving. I generally recommend people read the Saheeh International Translation–this is the one which has been recommend to me by my Arabic teacher (who is… the best ever… very biased I am) and also by someone I know who has memorized the entire Qur’an (and can translate it at will) and others whose opinion I trust.

Is it better to read in Arabic? Yes, I won’t deny that. I myself am more powerfully moved when I read it in Arabic. However, if you are just reading it to get a general idea of the meaning, English translations are enough.

If I as a Muslim am allowed to read the Qur’an in English, then certainly you as a non-Muslim are allowed to. I have a Mormon friend who told me he wanted to learn Arabic before reading the Qur’an–and I wouldn’t recommend that for anyone! For someone truly interested, the nuances can be explained by a Qur’an scholar, or even a good book of tafsir (commentary/exegesis), some of which have also been translated into English.

Maybe they tell us that because we are not Muslims or becoming Muslim. If I can get an idea in English, than that is enough. Thank you for the recommendation

 

[paarsurrey]

Maybe they tell us that because we are not Muslims or becoming Muslim. If I can get an idea in English, than that is enough. Thank you for the recommendation

Hi

Well I have a different opinion. It is other way round. Please start learning Quran and you would know the Arabic language also, that would be easy.

For a good English tranlation and commentry, you may visit if your like, the following websites; no need to consult any scholars who are themselves stuck up in the medievial ages or they are their literal followers:
www3.alislam.org/index.jsp
alislam.org/
English w/ 5 Vol. Commentary

Thanks

 

[ralphinal]

Hi

Well I have a different opinion. It is other way round. Please start learning Quran and you would know the Arabic language also, that would be easy.

For a good English tranlation and commentry, you may visit if your like, the following websites; no need to consult any scholars who are themselves stuck up in the medievial ages or they are their literal followers:
www3.alislam.org/index.jsp
alislam.org/
English w/ 5 Vol. Commentary

Thanks

Thanks, Paar. I understand what you are saying.

 

[jblake]

Sister Amy;:

Aye. Which is why lay Christians were not allowed to read the Bible until they had learned Latin. While the Qur’an has been translated into many languages.

Prior to the invention of the printing press, manuscripts were expensive. (One complete manuscript was worth roughly the cost of all of the land of a county.) Only the rich, or the powerful could afford manuscripts. As a side effect, literacy was low across the board.

After the printing press was invented, literacy rates in Europe did increase. Paralleling this was the translation and distribution of Bibles in European languages. Whilst the Catholic Church did prohibit the distribution of Bibles in languages other than Latin, where it had the legal authority to do so, production in countries where the Catholic Church held minimal political power rose.

I’ll also point out that Latin was, and is, the official language of the Catholic Church. It was only at the beginning of the twentieth century that Latin lost its dominance as the language of scholars. Until the nineteenth century, if one went to school, everything was in Latin. (This applies to Europe.)

I suspect that once one factors out the technological advances that have made translation and publication easier over the centuries, you’ll find that there are far fewer translations of the Q’ran, than the Bible. (Probably more than the second most translated book,but then that religion isn’t interested in being a religion, much less gaining adherents.)

 

[jblake]

tomshaikh;:

And people who do research on The Quran for years known as Dr. or Br have no problem to translate it easily in same word dito to dito.

Which is why they issue Fatwas on those who disagree with their assumptions, and can prove beyond any shadow of doubt things that are extremely uncomfortable for Muslims to accept.

Oh, and on the topic of those scholar’s, why are they prohibited form using the older extant texts, that have a number of differences with the received text of the Q’ran. Differences that are substantial?

The Quran and get studied there in Islamic School.

You can also explain why critical study of the Q;ran is prohibited, when it veers towards demonstrating that certain pet theories and beliefs aren’t what the text originally said.

Allah/God say so that Allah am taking care of The Quran & Allah words will not be changed for ever.

Which explains why there are three known major redactions of the Q’ran.

xan

jonathon

 

[rpp]

Prior to the invention of the printing press, manuscripts were expensive. (One complete manuscript was worth roughly the cost of all of the land of a county.)

I think that may be a bit of an exaggeration. However, it is not an exaggeration to say that a complete Bible was often the most valuable thing for miles around. It would represent several years income for moderately well-off person. That is why they were often chained to reading tables; so that they would be available for people to read.

 

[paarsurrey]

I think that may be a bit of an exaggeration. However, it is not an exaggeration to say that a complete Bible was often the most valuable thing for miles around. It would represent several years income for moderately well-off person. That is why they were often chained to reading tables; so that they would be available for people to read.

Hi

Kindly give reference for “they were often chained to reading tables”. A queer thing!

Thanks